Newbie 810 - Game over!

[Zachrulez]

Hey guys, I still need to go through and read this game.

For now I'll

Unvote:

in case my predecesor was voting for anyone.

[Zachrulez]

Hi Kitty.

[Zachrulez]

Do you believe anything can be gleaned from anyone's random vote? Why?

Sure. If they claim a true random vote, like a dice roll or something like that, you can determine that they are trying to escape any accountability for their vote. Also, sometimes in a random vote, someone will give reasoning that's a bit spot, and can be a great way to start the game along by scrutinizing it.

Do you think it would be a good idea to lynch quickly on Day 1? Why?

In general no. Without any information to analyze from people's actions the odds of lynching a scum on a quick lynch are 2 in 9. On top of that we go into day 2 with little more than a few flips. There are always exceptions though, like if someone claims scum (or any actions that pretty much out them as scum), then you lynch the bastard like lightning.

Do you follow a "Lynch all Lurkers" policy? Why?

Not really. It's better to get replacements for the people who aren't posting in the game or have flaked out of the game. There is a kind of lurking that I do find scummy though, it's called active lurking. It's where you post just enough to stay in the game, but don't actively partake in the game. It's a very useful tactic to avoid committing yourself to anything that might make you look suspicious as scum.

Do you follow a "Lynch all Liars" policy? Why?

This is actually a pretty complex question when I think about it. The short answer really is, it depends on what the lie is. What you have to keep in mind is that there may be reasons for townies to not disclose certain information, or to not tell the truth in a particular situation.

Let's take someone who just happens to have the role of doctor in a given game. A common newbie question would be to ask people how they might play as cop or doctor, or anything like that. In that kind of a situation, they may not want to tell the truth about how they play the role so as not to give off power tells that will make them easily identifiable to the scum. So if the person comes out and claims doctor later in the game and says they lied about how they would play the role to misdirect scum, would you lynch them just because they lied?

On the other hand, lying about things that players did in order to make them look more suspicious is scummy and you should lynch those kind of liars.

[Zachrulez]

Also, just so you guys know, I'm also an IC.

Feel free to ask me any game theory questions about anything you're not comfortable or sure about.

[Zachrulez]

I believe that's L-2.

Role Claim? In addition to explaination.

Is there any particular reason you think L-2 is a good time to ask for a roleclaim?

[Zachrulez]

Also I'm noticing that my predecessor earned a few votes for voting for a no lynch.

I am suspicious of both votes, most particularly geekalicious' especially because he quickly transitions into an opportunistic Blueraven vote.

Why is it, that my predecessor got hammered so hard for his no lynch stance, rather than someone taking the time out to explain to him why the idea was bad?

Supporting no lynch is a common newbie error that must be beaten out of them with a logical explanation, and the best one for it is that it takes away one of the town's lynches. (You go from having 3 with 9 players to 2 with 8.)

Anyway, Blueraven does look a little bit fishy to me, but I am weary of the speed of the bandwagon that formed on him. My gut is telling me that scum are driving this bandwagon.

[Zachrulez]

Hey, let's not have epically long posts like that, please. Makes the game much more of a hassle than it needs to be. Linking to posts in reference is fine, and you could also just... not chime in on every single thing.

That being said, I'm a fan of the TFGM wagon.

I find Reckoner a bit suspect for this post. It gives me the feel that he is discouraging discussion.

I personally didn't mind post 39. While a game full of text walls can be really dreadful to read, posting one every now and then when necessary is not a bad thing at all, and I would hate to see reverendpsycho stop posting certain thoughts or not giving insight to the level he did on 39 because of one IC's complaint about the post.

[Zachrulez]

Additionally, in reference to my votes thus far, the first vote according to TheFlyingGreenMoneky was in coordination with KittyMo. This vote for BlueRaven, if in coordination with anyone, would be me with Krauthammer. I'm seriously doubting that I'd have the sudden ability to switch scum buddies to coordinate the attack. In both cases, I have added my vote because the players had exhibited scum behavior and having a two votes on them seemed like a proper impetus to push them into discussing their actions without seriously threatening them.

If I presume you scum for the purposes of this post, where is it said that the people you are coordinating votes with have to be your scumbuddies? It could well be just as possible that as scum you could be weaving connections with townies to drag them down in a web of suspicious behavior if you ever flipped scum on a lynch.

[Zachrulez]

I see what you're trying to do. You're trying to say that I think more than 2 people are scum in an attempt to discredit my suspicions.

It is possible for more than 2 people to be suspicious in a given game where there are two scum. (If this wasn't true, townies would never get lynched.)

Finding more than 2 people suspicious is not the same thing as thinking more than 2 people are scum.

Your defenses only make me feel even stronger about the fact that you're most likely scum.

Vote: Geekalicious

[Zachrulez]

I'm sorry to say, but supporting no lynch in a newbie game is not necessarily scummy. It's a newbie thing, and it's precisely the reason we have newbie games and ICs, so that we can explain to those players that it's not a wise move.

And why is my vote for you suspicious? Do you think I have some reasons beyond what I stated?

[Zachrulez]

xRECKONERx

Post 6:

Votes KittyMo for not having a kitty avatar.

Post 9:

Follows Lynch All Liars.

Post 20:

Has a combative playstyle, dismisses game posted by KittyMo as “his first game, isn’t his meta.” Sure...

Post 41:

Asks for shorter posts. Stifling discussion?

Post 56:

Says he wasn’t stifling discussion, just doesn’t think one should respond to everything.

Post 67:

Votes BlueRaven for not understanding his point.

Post 91:

Says asking for further explanation is useless, as BlueRaven is a flustered newbie.

Post 116:

Says BlueRaven is best lynch candidate, but then wants more explaination. Contradiction w/ 91?

Post 165:

Votes reverendpsycho, asking for an explanation on geek’s contradictions.

Scum-O-Meter says: 6.5 out of 10

Hi. Reckoner here. Allow me to explain that if you think I'm actually stifling discussion by asking that people 1) don't wall-o-quote me into a coma and 2) don't feel the obligation to respond to EVERYTHING, then that's just a bit absurd. Most Mafia players would agree with me that it's not always a great strategy to comment on every last thing going on in the game.

And BlueRaven is the "best" lynch candidate based on his playstyle, but something in my gut tells me he's just a flustered newbie,

which is why I didn't hop right on the Raven wagon from the start like everyone else.

Oh yeah?

Post 67 for ya

Didn't realize that I still had my vote on KittyMo, so

unvote

.

And BlueRaven, I'm not even sure what you're talking about with the poll talking about newbie mistakes, and I'm not sure how that poll would be supportive of you voting for someone solely for the sake of bandwagoning.

Vote: BlueRaven

[Zachrulez]

KittyMo

Post 5:

Votes Krauthammer for having the funniest username.

Post 10:

Admits to lurking being a pet peeve of hers. Likes to get them replaced, not lynched.

Post 16:

Posts a game for geekalicious to read where she and xRECKONERx play, and xRECKONERx fails at scum.

Post 18:

Playstyle is scumhunting, which she sometimes fails at.

Post 29:

Votes TFGM for voting no lynch and claiming to be experienced. Inference: No Lynch is a horrible idea.

Post 61:

Tells TFGM to stop screwing with the game, unless he’s frustrated scum.

Post 160:

Accuses me of “tunnel vision” and mentions an “investigation.” Cop breadcrumb?

Post 162:

FOSs reverendpsycho for having weak voting reasons.

Scum-O-Meter says: 3 out of 10

Hello rolefishing.

God that's so terribly scummy. I'm really going to have to think about where I want my vote now.

[Zachrulez]

KittyMo

Post 5:

Votes Krauthammer for having the funniest username.

Post 10:

Admits to lurking being a pet peeve of hers. Likes to get them replaced, not lynched.

Post 16:

Posts a game for geekalicious to read where she and xRECKONERx play, and xRECKONERx fails at scum.

Post 18:

Playstyle is scumhunting, which she sometimes fails at.

Post 29:

Votes TFGM for voting no lynch and claiming to be experienced. Inference: No Lynch is a horrible idea.

Post 61:

Tells TFGM to stop screwing with the game, unless he’s frustrated scum.

Post 160:

Accuses me of “tunnel vision” and mentions an “investigation.” Cop breadcrumb?

Post 162:

FOSs reverendpsycho for having weak voting reasons.

Scum-O-Meter says: 3 out of 10

Hello rolefishing.

God that's so terribly scummy. I'm really going to have to think about where I want my vote now.

Listen, even she marked it with quotes. So she didn't want us to see it? Fine.

Directed @ BlueRaven

1. Who do you currently find suspicious and why?
2. Do you remember your entire thought process for voting me? If so, could you please explain it to us?

3. Who do you currently find not suspcious and why?

(Good question, Reckoner!)

ok after an extensive examination of all the posts b4 my increadably nwb mistake i've come to a conclusion:

1) that TFGM (or his replacement) for the evidance that other players have given against him being town. And krauthammer for defending, but this could be turned around saying that he's just giving his own opinion and thats it. Of corse this could go one even further saying that im vilanising them...

2) Yes i can. I was being brain-dead acting on spur of the moment being a nwb. But that has changed (i hope) seeing ive been putting time into reading some guides.

3) Im not sure realy...

Ok, I think you've answered #1 & #2 sufficiently for now. (Continue to update your answer on #1 as time goes on, though, if you're ever unsure what to post.) However, I don't understand why you don't want to answer #3. Is it because you don't want to let the scum know who to NK? I will accept not answering the question if you have a reason for not answering, but I'm not going to let you "I don't know" your way out of this one.

I don't like how unforgiving 12keyblade is. Geez, cut someone some slack.

FOS: 12keyblade.

I think I've found someone else more suspicious than either 12keyblade or BlueRaven, though. I'll be back with a content post later today or tomorrow. If my investigation turns out to be fruitful, that is.

I don't see them marked with quotes like you claim.

Unvote: Vote:12keyblade

[Zachrulez]

I don't think it would ever be a good idea to reveal the cop, when would that ever be good for town, especially on the first day?

Not reveal, breadcrumb. Think about it:

Day 3, 5 left alive. Bob claims he is the cop and has a guilty on Joe. Joe challenges him to prove it. Bob points to post 54, where he mentioned that he was "investigating" someone. Mary and Janey are convinced, and Joe the Mafia is strung up and lynched.

Yeah, except for the fact that scum are reading this thread too...

[Zachrulez]

I disagree with the reads on Reckoner and geekalicious.

Can you be more specific about why?

Also, what do you think about Keyblade?

[Zachrulez]

I feel as if Zach is controling the game at this moment. Leading sheep to water is ridiculously easy in a noobie game... especially when you're an IC. I'm not in ANYWAY saying don't listen to Zach. I'm saying make sure that you're thinking for yourself and not just following the logic of others. It's fine to agree... just don't blindly follow.

Really? I don't feel like this is the case in this game at the moment.

Can you explain better why you feel this way?

[Zachrulez]

Also, what do you think about Keyblade?

I find that I disagree with him on some things, but that doesn't neccessarily make him scummy. It mostly seems like differences in opinion.

Um, I think I'd better refrain from speaking about the breadcrumbing topic, since I think it's just going to make things worse for the town. It did seem to me like he was simply pointing everything he noticed out; not neccessarily meaning to rolefish...but I'm not entirely sure.

I don't know, he's probably a 4 or 4.5 on my scum-o-meter.

Ah, then we disagree here. What he did is a form of rolefishing, and it's something that I find very scummy.

Couple that up with Keyblade's post 139, and you have a pattern of role fishing. (Even vanilla townie claims help the scum narrow down PR candidates.)

[Zachrulez]

Reckoner's quick vote on me after an FoS from KittyMo seems suspect.

What do you mean by this statement? Mind elaborating? I'm confused...

He votes for me herewith no real explanation, just asking for me to explain why I think geek contradicted himself. Granted, if he didn't like my explanation, then voted for me, it would be less fishy. Also, it seems that other than your FoS on me, he has nothing to justify his vote for me. Then he later claims here that blueraven is the best candidate for lynch. If blueraven's the best lynch candidate, why the vote on me? That seems very odd.

Yeah, that is odd. His money doesn't seem to be where his mouth is.

[Zachrulez]

I don't think it would ever be a good idea to reveal the cop, when would that ever be good for town, especially on the first day?

Not reveal, breadcrumb. Think about it:

Day 3, 5 left alive. Bob claims he is the cop and has a guilty on Joe. Joe challenges him to prove it. Bob points to post 54, where he mentioned that he was "investigating" someone. Mary and Janey are convinced, and Joe the Mafia is strung up and lynched.

Yeah, no. As you say, Bob would point out HIS OWN POST at that point. A third party person wouldn't reveal this BEFORE THE COP EVEN HAS A CHANCE TO INVESTIGATE. Bad plan. Bad, bad plan.

Still, I don't think that your scum if only because I think scum would talk about this during the night phase, rather than bringing it up now.

Really not liking this post. Kraut both attacks Keyblade for pointing out a breadcrumb and then also defends him with WIFOM.

[Zachrulez]

KittyMo: KeyBlade12 and Zach currently draw my eye toward them.
KeyBlade12 because of the bread crumb thing. Pointing out that someone hinted at being cop worries me.
Zach because he's leading.

@Zach I feel as though you're leading because people are following you. If you look back at the thread you'll see that people follow your logic without really thinking for themselves. (Or at least that's how it looks to me... Maybe they just aren't stating their own thoughts)

If you can show me examples of people following me like you say, then fair enough I suppose.

[Zachrulez]

I'm apparently not seeing what you are seeing reckoner.

[Zachrulez]

So, Keyblade. I notice you're still voting for Blueraven.

As I glace at your "Scum O Meter" (Patent pending?) Blueraven is tied for highed on it with geekalicious.

Since I am finding it difficult to follow your thought process, and where you assert each are scummy in your analysis, (Since I can't figure out what formula you're using or what actions you are quantifying for your scores.) can you summarize an explanation for me to why you're voting for Blueraven over Geek?

At the moment I'm quite interested in everyone on Blueraven's wagon. (Plus Reckoner.)

[Zachrulez]

I'm kinda looking for a more specific explanation here.

[Zachrulez]

I'm asking because of this.

geekalicious

Post 33:

Votes TFGM, following ronnieroo and KittyMo’s logic.

Post 64:

Votes BlueRaven for following the crowd. Hypocrite?

Post 136:

Due to his explaination, agrees with BlueRaven that he could have made a newbie mistake. Still did not unvote.

Post 152:

Is getting tired of the “I’m a newbie” argument.

Post 157:

Says he is not following others, he is evaluating points others have made and the suspect’s actions.

*note* Most unincluded posts include a) asking questions, or 2) following others’ logic.

Scum-O-Meter says: 7 out of 10

A lot of which is based on the way Geek reacts to Blueraven.

The behavior seems very consistant with scum trying to secure a lynch on a scummy townie to me. (Ignoring the explanations that are reasonable and standing pat with a vote.)

Unvote:

I don't paticularly like the way you've approached the game. (Especially in one very specific regard that I don't want to repeat.)

But I've changed my mind upon reflection. I no longer think you are scum. I think Reckoner and Geek are.

Vote: xRECKONERx

Reckoner's reaction to Psycho is really quite telling IMO.

[Zachrulez]

Psycho has a lot of content on Geek, but he has also mentioned other players. (More prominently in earlier posts.)

However, your only real reactions to psycho are in response to his suspicions to Geek. (And a somewhat interesting complaint about his posting style.)

But yeah. He voices concerns early on about Geek and other players (post 39), you question SPECIFICALLY about his suspicions on Geek (Post 56). He votes Geek (post 158), you vote him. (Post 161)

You seem a little bit too concerned about what he thinks about Geek, and that coupled with the pattern of behavior I'm seeing from you in response to his suspicions on Geek is something I can't ignore.

[Zachrulez]

So because the only thing I questioned him on was his case on geek, I'm OBVIOUSLY geek's scum partner? ::eyeroll::

If you're so sure that geek is scum and I'm buddying him, then why are you voting me over geek?

If you have to ask the question in order to get my vote off you, the answer isn't hard to find.

There's various reasons you could be defending Geek from Psycho, not all of which require Geek to be scum. I think it's very likely that if you're scum, so is he, and vice versa. My main issue stems from the fact that apparently his attacks on Geek are the only thing about him that bother you. Why is that? I notice you point the Keyblade thing out now, but you didn't seem that interested in it before.

[Zachrulez]

Also, it wasn't just that for me voting psycho. Try looking at his posts for yourself and making sense of them.

Like, calling Keyblade's random vote on psycho a OMGUS, when we were still in the random voting stage. Not to mention when Keyblade tries to correct psycho's mistake in saying he was the last person to confirm, he calls it suspicious! Well, maybe I think it's suspicious he's using his own mistakes to cast suspicion on someone else.

It doesn't matter if it happened in RVS, it's still an OMGUS vote. Technically he called the correction akward, you seem to be blowing Psycho's action out of proportion here.

I also don't like how he admits here, after I question him, that he only saw one quote taken out of context, not two. It's backpedalling, and it seemed like he was trying to make the case on geek seem much more blown out of proportion than it actually was. Not only that, but when he votes geek, he basically does it because of a "contradiction" in geek's post.

If he stuck to an inaccurate point of Geek taking two quotes out of context, would you find it less scummy? Is there any way for this newbie to win on this paticular point, or would you not be satisfied no matter what?

This is the point where I voted him, because I not only found his long wall o' text post a bit suspicious (with the OMGUS talk), but I also saw no contradiction. Psycho explains here that the contradiction is that geek says he

doesn't follow others

but then says that he looks at everyone else's viewpoints. I see NO contradiction there, especially since psycho seemed to conveniently forget about the part where geek says "I look at the person's actions" (analyzes their actions), and the part where he says "I take the action I see fit" (makes his own decision). It's a stretch to call it a contradiction, at the very least.

I suppose it depends on how you interpret Geek's post. Still, I don't see how this is as insanely scummy as you think it is. You also seem to think BlueRaven is really scummy yet you aren't all that comfortable with lynching him. Oh, and when you come to the end of this paragraph, you backpeddel a little bit on it not being a contradiction, to saying it's a stretch. (Because Geek's intent might not be all that clear from reading.)

Oh, and let's not forget how he tries to set up an OMGUS, calling my quick vote "suspicious". Without elaborating. And here it is, Tuesday night, two days after he last posted, and he has yet to come back in and say anything.

He got the same amount of elaboration from your vote to be fair. I stand by the fact that I find it very strange and very fishy that you seem to be most concerned about his attacks on Geek.

[Zachrulez]

@Zachrulez, why are you whip-lashing your vote around so much? You quickly go from voting for me to voting for 12Keyblade to now voting for xRECKONERx. This doesn't so look much like meticulous scum hunting/ pressure voting to me as it seems like you just finding someone else to blame on the spur of the moment.

Hahaha...

That's a pretty fair point to a degree, but you're being critical of me for changing my mind. It is something I am known to do from time to time.

In that link above I do it pretty much through the early game. In this game. I prominently do it on day 3.

I'm just putting it out there that it's not really that indicative of my alignment.

To be honest though, I do find all three of you suspicious and am having a hard time figuring out which one of you I should be focusing on. It's getting kinda late now, but I'll probably have a question or two for Reckoner in my next post.

[Zachrulez]

Well, seeing as how all he's done is attack geek, there's not much else for me to go off of, now is there?

>.>

And I can't believe my stance on BlueRaven is still being fucking debated. I said he's done scummy things, has appeared the most scummy, but I attribute that to ultimate newbness than anything. I've seen too many people in games prior come in and act like that because they're not really sure how to play and get lynched right off the bat.

but OH NO NOW I'M DEFENDING BLUERAVEN SO WHO AM I REALLY SCUMPARTNERED WITH?

Defending someone =/= scummy, thank you very much. And in any case I wouldn't say I'm defending Geek so much as I am pressuring Psycho as to why he decided to vote Geek in the first place.

It's not entirely true that defending someone =/= scummy. There is merit to the idea that it's not automatically scummy. But it really depends on a lot of things, including the possible motives of the person doing it.

As I did a read of you in iso today, I saw a lot of posts from you that were heavy in mention of Blueraven and Psycho.

I would be interested to know what you think of Keyblade and Geekalicious, cause I haven't seen a lot from you on opinions on anyone outside of Raven and Psycho.

[Zachrulez]

Where is Kittymo?

Ronnieroo? BlueRaven? Kraut?

Looks like we need some prods and maybe some replacements...

[Zachrulez]

I can't get a good read on Keyblade, he seems too trigger happy, but I'm not sure that's necessarily a scum tell or a null tell.

His pattern of role fishing is certainly scummy in my opinion, certainly anti-town.

Geek, on the other hand, seems town to me. Maybe I'm missing something, but he's voting with logical foundation for each of his votes and has yet to say anything to catch my eye in any particular way.

Question for ya here. Do you think your read on Geek may be biasing your perception of Psycho's attacks on him?

[Zachrulez]

EBWOP

I can't get a good read on Keyblade, he seems too trigger happy, but I'm not sure that's necessarily a scum tell or a null tell.

His pattern of role fishing is

certainly

scummy in my opinion, certainly anti-town.

[Zachrulez]

KittyMo: Sunday 7:54 pm.
ronnieroo: Sunday 5:39 pm.
BlueRaven: Sunday 3:02 am.
Krauthammer: Sunday 2:30 pm.

Prod on BlueRaven, ceratinly, but the others have a few hours left.

I think the requirement is every 48 hours for this game, but I could be wrong.

[Zachrulez]

Well at least we're in agreement on this matter.

Mod: Prods on Kittymo, Ronnieroo, Blueraven, and Krauthammer please.

[Zachrulez]

Well we do agree that Geek and Reckoner are scummy.

[Zachrulez]

That was not the only thing that I found scummy about your play.

I've pointed a few other things out.

And I have a question for you to answer in 236.

[Zachrulez]

A few other things that have bugged me about Reckoner for a while.

Hey, let's not have epically long posts like that, please. Makes the game much more of a hassle than it needs to be. Linking to posts in reference is fine, and you could also just... not chime in on every single thing.

That being said, I'm a fan of the TFGM wagon.

I find Reckoner a bit suspect for this post. It gives me the feel that he is discouraging discussion.

I personally didn't mind post 39. While a game full of text walls can be really dreadful to read, posting one every now and then when necessary is not a bad thing at all, and I would hate to see reverendpsycho stop posting certain thoughts or not giving insight to the level he did on 39 because of one IC's complaint about the post.

xRECKONERx

Post 6:

Votes KittyMo for not having a kitty avatar.

Post 9:

Follows Lynch All Liars.

Post 20:

Has a combative playstyle, dismisses game posted by KittyMo as “his first game, isn’t his meta.” Sure...

Post 41:

Asks for shorter posts. Stifling discussion?

Post 56:

Says he wasn’t stifling discussion, just doesn’t think one should respond to everything.

Post 67:

Votes BlueRaven for not understanding his point.

Post 91:

Says asking for further explanation is useless, as BlueRaven is a flustered newbie.

Post 116:

Says BlueRaven is best lynch candidate, but then wants more explaination. Contradiction w/ 91?

Post 165:

Votes reverendpsycho, asking for an explanation on geek’s contradictions.

Scum-O-Meter says: 6.5 out of 10

Hi. Reckoner here. Allow me to explain that if you think I'm actually stifling discussion by asking that people 1) don't wall-o-quote me into a coma and 2) don't feel the obligation to respond to EVERYTHING, then that's just a bit absurd. Most Mafia players would agree with me that it's not always a great strategy to comment on every last thing going on in the game.

And BlueRaven is the "best" lynch candidate based on his playstyle, but something in my gut tells me he's just a flustered newbie,

which is why I didn't hop right on the Raven wagon from the start like everyone else.

Oh yeah?

Post 67 for ya

Didn't realize that I still had my vote on KittyMo, so

unvote

.

And BlueRaven, I'm not even sure what you're talking about with the poll talking about newbie mistakes, and I'm not sure how that poll would be supportive of you voting for someone solely for the sake of bandwagoning.

Vote: BlueRaven

[Zachrulez]

Zach, you're taking xRECKONERx's post out of context. Not only that, but his point is "I didn't jump on it right away." He's correct. He was vote #3 on a 4-person bandwagon. That's not right away.

Go back and look at the timestamps of the posts that followed Blueraven's going with the crowd vote.

That fact that his vote was 3rd is incidental, as he voted within a half hour of BlueRaven's "scummy" post.

[Zachrulez]

Blueraven's vote on Kittymo happened July 2nd at 5:10pm

Blueraven's bandwagon:
1st vote Kraut 5:18pm same day
2nd vote Geek 5:26pm same day
3rd vote Reckoner 5:38pm same day

Just for reference.

[Zachrulez]

Zach, you're taking xRECKONERx's post out of context. Not only that, but his point is "I didn't jump on it right away." He's correct. He was vote #3 on a 4-person bandwagon. That's not right away.

Go back and look at the timestamps of the posts that followed Blueraven's going with the crowd vote.

That fact that his vote was 3rd is incidental, as he voted within a half hour of BlueRaven's "scummy" post.

Dang...sorry dude, you're on your own for a while. It's lunchtime here.

Damn you and your eastern time zone. I still got about another hour.

[Zachrulez]

No, I do not.

Heh... this made me think of an image of two kids fighting.

Yes you do!

No I do not!

Yes you do!

Do not!

Do too!

We could really regress in a hurry if I resorted to that kind of response.

[Zachrulez]

You asked me a question, I gave you an answer.

Also, I didn't sit and ride the BlueRaven train either like some people, I voted him because it was scummy, then unvoted relatively soon after to stop a lynch after I had a change of heart.

Are you presuming that Blueraven is town now?

[Zachrulez]

As for the argument between Reckoner and Zachrulez, I think Zachrulez is winning. Reckoner seems to be changing his mind all the time as for what he did.

I still just don't really get why you guys are all finding Geek so suspicious, though. His behavior that you find scummy I find to be a null tell.

Your lunch sounded good, 12keyblade. :p Which reminds me, I haven't eaten breakfast yet...

I'll hold out hope that you see the light on Geek.

I noticed that you don't have a vote active at the moment, which compels me to ask you...

Who do you find the most suspicious at this point in time?

[Zachrulez]

What do you find suspicious about Psycho?

[Zachrulez]

I suppose I understand your reasoning. (As I look back on it.) I disagree with how scummy Psycho is for the most part.

I'm also finding Geek scummy. It stems back to TFGM vote that quickly changed into a blueraven vote. His reaction to my Reckoner vote was quite interesting, as was his reaction to my explanation of why my vote is finding it's way around a bit. (Part of the reasons I voted for Reckoner was specifically to get a Geek reaction to it.)

We do seem to have some agreement on Reckoner and Keyblade, and strangely, I could actually see them as scum together. (Pretty much true for any combination of Reckoner, Geek, and Keyblade really.)

Not really sure what side of the fence to class ronnieroo on. I'm not a fan of him suspecting me solely for being an "influential IC" especially while ignoring the influence Reckoner is claiming to have over the blueraven wagon. Still, the concerns could be legitimate.

Also, I think Blueraven is newbie town, but I wouldn't bet my reputation on it.

You had some earlier suspicion of TFGM. I'm kinda curious as to what your thoughts are on me as well.

[Zachrulez]

I'm also finding Geek scummy. It stems back to TFGM vote that quickly changed into a blueraven vote. His reaction to my Reckoner vote was quite interesting, as was his reaction to my explanation of why my vote is finding it's way around a bit. (Part of the reasons I voted for Reckoner was specifically to get a Geek reaction to it.)

To clarify this paragraph a bit. I was trying to say part of the reason I voted Reckoner was specifically to get a Geek reaction to it. I had intended to change the wording to one of the reasons, but I guess I only got about partway through that. Either wording works, but I figured saying one of the reasons communicates the intention of what I was doing more clearly.

Just wanted to clarify that a bit since the way it came out looked a tad confusing.

[Zachrulez]

So he's the best lynch candidate and the most scummy, but you think he's town?

Having trouble making sense of that.

Anyway... if you think he's town, do you think scum is on his wagon?

[Zachrulez]

Oh man...

What he did was not all that scummy IMO. It's indicative of REALLY BAD play yes, but what is the scum motivation for bandwagoning someone like that so blatantly?

Currently on Raven's wagon are (Krauthammer, Geek, and Keyblade)

You've already said you think Geek is town, and you can't get a good read on Key, so... Kraut?

Keeping in mind that while we discuss this you are voting for Psycho.

[Zachrulez]

Strange. Keyblade is V/LA for the exact same days.

[Zachrulez]

Just one? Not one or both?

I never asked you what you thought of Kraut did I?

[Zachrulez]

Well, I never asked him what he thinks about Kraut's play.

I'm trying to get as much info out of Reckoner as I can to see if I can put myself in his shoes and make sense of his play as town from his perspective.

[Zachrulez]

Also, I get the feeling you're just asking aimless questions without really scumhunting. Tunnel vision much?

Asking questions of a top suspect is the very core of scumhunting.

I would appreciate an answer to my question of what you think about Kraut.

[Zachrulez]

And... burn!

Geek accuses me of shifting my vote around too easily and Reckoner accuses me of tunnel vision.

This game is great.

[Zachrulez]

Too lazy to do quotes.

To answer your earlier question, Reckoner, I'm really confused by your stance on BlueRaven.

I don't really like Zach's attitude at the moment, so right now, that's probably biasing me against him and toward Reckoner. *shrug*

What's wrong with my attitude?

Also, deliberately avoiding questions is scummy, no matter how you try to justify it. That's exactly what Reckoner is doing right now. (Geek is contributing by trying to get him out of answering the question.)

[Zachrulez]

Also, deliberately avoiding questions is scummy, no matter how you try to justify it. That's exactly what Reckoner is doing right now. (Geek is contributing by trying to get him out of answering the question.)

Eh....? How am I trying to get xRECKONERx out of answering the question? All I mentioned earlier was that you did indeed ask him a question.

It wasn't the same question though. It was asking him if he thought scum was Kraut based on a process of elimination on the wagon of having a town read on you, and no read on Keyblade.

The follow up question I asked was a specific one about what he thought of Kraut. It's not an unfair question to ask, and it's a bit different then the question you claim I already asked him.

Anyway, what IS relevant is the fact that Reckoner isn't exactly very forthcoming about who he thinks is scum even though he thinks there is scum on Raven's wagon and that Raven is newb town. He seems a lot more interested in getting either Raven or Psycho lynched than he does in actually doing any scumhunting on the scum is on Raven's wagon theory.

[Zachrulez]

It just seems like you're being just a little overly harsh & sarcastic. I'd appreciate it if you'd tone it down a little, but it's nothing too bad.

If you show me where I'm doing it, I will explain to you whether I am being sarcastic or not.

Clearly I am being harsh. That's just the way I play off of people that I think are scum.

[Zachrulez]

At this point, I'll give you some time to re-read the game and attempt to get a better read on the relevant players on Raven's wagon. (There is a good amount of content on all of them to do so.)

I also want to give other players a chance to check in on our exchange without our back and forth continuing to consume the entire thread.

[Zachrulez]

Also if you're town, try to put yourself in my shoes and see the game from my perspective and see if you can see legitimate reason for me to suspect you. (This is very much a better approach then trying to discredit my attacks out of hand. Sometimes it's better to admit missteps than it is to stubbornly carry on as if you've done nothing wrong.)

Also consider the possibility that Geek might be scum and buddying up to you in order to influence you... if you are town of course.

[Zachrulez]

sorry my computer's been playin up recently and i've only just fixed it. But im bk and hopefully my comp wont break down again.

What do you think about the events that have transpired since your last post?

Who do you think is most likely scum?

[Zachrulez]

Is there anything specific that you want from Kraut?

[Zachrulez]

I was just curious.

I had a look at his activity level prior to the 5 days he has gone without posting, and I think there's a good possibility we won't ever hear from him again.

[Zachrulez]

Oh hey...

What do you think about Krauthammer's contributions to the game Geek?

[Zachrulez]

Blueraven, please respond to post 300.

I think Reckoner meant to say Krauthammer needs to be replaced.

[Zachrulez]

oh right.

I think that you've done alot of discussing but all in all you havn't gone very far. Somewhere along the line something happened and some how u got around in a circle not answering any questions... thats just in my opinion anyway.

I think that keyblade is quite scummy but appart from that i think everyone is townie, but now thinking about it, Krauthammer was one of my suspects b4, and i think he still may be....

Even as little as there is in here, this is actually quite helpful in getting us somewhere.

Why do you find Keyblade suspicious?

Why do you find Kraut suspicious?

[Zachrulez]

Unvote:

I've read Krauthammer in iso a few times, and BlueRaven seems to have difficulty putting together why his suspects are suspicious, but when I read Kraut I noticed that he cautioned against Bandwagoning in the case of TFGM, but then was VERY VERY quick to cast a vote on BlueRaven, and was fine with leaving it on when an early bandwagon that he really didn't want to start, began forming. Furthermore on the matter, he pushes hard that BlueRaven is scummy, but cautions against further pushing the wagon and lynching Raven. It just seems really off to me, like he's trying to blend in as a concerned townie.

It seems to fit newbie scum behavior the more I think about it.

[Zachrulez]

Grabbing quotes on Kraut...

I really don't want to start a bandwagon so early in the game

, so I won't vote for TFGM, but I do find basically every post either scummy or radically misinformed. What kind of games do you usually play TFGM? Why are these so different?

just cus im going with the crowd:

Vote: KittyMo

Okay, this is very, very skummy to me. You post one no content post and then come back just to put the third vote on a possible bandwagon, on your own admission? If you're going to vote for KittyMo, explain why, not just because of a blatant jokevote and a blatant OMGUS?

Vote: BlueRaven

Yeah, BlueRaven is as scummy as all hell, but no one else vote for him for now, we don't want this to end before it has to.

Noting at this point that Kraut had stated he really didn't want to start a bandwagon and then was perfectly fine with Raven's wagon. It's also worth noting that he found TFGM scummy prior to Raven's actions as well.

I'm keeping the vote on now, as there still isn't anyone as skummy out there to my eyes, but the lack of answer is making me think he thought it was still joke phase? If you do anything that's townie at all (contribution, anything) I'll unvote you.

Looks like an attempt to play the concerned townie as I read over it repeatedly.

Okay, I'll go over the first two people to really get attention so far.

I'm almost certain that TFGM (or, I guess, whoever will replace him) is town. His original vote for no lynch and subsequent OMGUS vote were skummy, but everything he's done since then, including dropping out, seem to indicate that he was really just someone who was not at all used to this kind of mafia.

BlueRaven is a different story. I recognize that there is still the real chance that he is a new townie, but I think that there is just as much chance that he is mafia who voted for KittyMo and then would deflect all criticism with a clear indication of "newbieness." Even more than the vote itself, I find his next post his scummiest:

ac.... dam.... thats not good... i read a poll earlyer saying about a newbie mistake... i think im the person that just slipped up and did the newbie mistake.
I'll stand by my vote for now just to see what happens.

This post feels more like an attempt to deflect attention with the "newbie" card than a real reflection of inexperienced newness. I'm keeping my vote on him and will continue to do so until he gives a real and clear response to why he voted and contributes to the dialog. He's really hiding behind his lack of experience, but there are others here who have never played a game (including myself) who don't come off as scummy as he does.

Swing and a miss! He attempts to drive home the case on Blueraven here. He makes note of TFGM "scumminess" and how all his actions after the no lynch vote and the OMGUS vote were town tells. Well no, actually all of TFGM's actions were nulltells and that of a newbie. His no lynch support could be seen as scummy if he knew any better, but given his play, there's no way to ever really know that.

Then there's the points he makes on BlueRaven, recognizing the possibility that he is newbie town, (Keeping the door open in case he is wrong.) but at the same time saying it's just as likely that he's mafia. Equally likely? WHIFF! You basically just admitted that every point you have on Raven is a null tell. Actions are considered scummy when they have a clear scum motivation that make a player more likely to be scum than town. If you say said actions make someone equally likely to be either alignment, it's a null tell. Kraut admits this and then focuses on the scum half of the argument to attempt to drive home a lynch on BlueRaven, while ignoring the apparently equally likely townie possibilities. All this, while apparently looking to be concerned about the prospect of a quick lynch that he seems to recognize would be in poor play.

Yeah, can you see which way I'm starting to lean? I think Kraut is very likely newbie scum.

Vote: Krauthammer

My pressure on Reckoner was actually quite productive. His frustration with me seems to be genuine, though he seems to fail to recognize that I do have decent points in favor of him being scum. That said, I've dropped him down a little bit, because the emotion and tone of his reaction give me the feel that he's a bit more likely to be town than I originally thought when I voted for him.

I've also had a second look at Geek and think I might have overreacted on his actions, and also that my perception of him might be a little biased since he had attacked my player slot. Important notes with him are that he was willing to admit misquoting when Psycho pointed it out, and that his position of bandwagon players actually does seem to be quite consistent for his newbie play. He tacked a vote on Monkey AND Raven with reletive ease without really contradicting a stated stance like Kraut did.

@Reckoner: I still don't really see the case on Psycho. It is my opinion that your pursuit of him over a group of people on a bandwagon you are sure has scum on it based on a gut feeling about him is a misguided play. I'm not sure if you have a history of playing this way as town, but if you do have town meta that shows that you're likely to play on gut like this, it would really help your cause in my eyes.

[Zachrulez]

Just letting you all know I'm here; I'm just rereading. I'll let you know if I notice anything out of place...

V/LA today and tomorrow

- I have to go camping =/; I'm leaving in a few hours.

Caught this after writing my text wall. Have fun!

[Zachrulez]

I've also had a second look at Geek and think I might have overreacted on his actions, and also that my perception of him might be a little biased since he had attacked my player slot.

Hm, are you saying you had a partially OMGUS vote/ bias out on me?

Kind of a gray area. I am analyzing your attacks on the player I replaced with knowledge of that particular players alignments. Attacks on myself were not at issue at that point in time.

[Zachrulez]

I also don't like how Kraut comfortably stated that my player slot was town when TFGM dropped out.

If I try to be unbiased about TFGM, if I were to play in any other seat, I would find his actions to be null tells. I wouldn't feel very comfortable calling him town at all.

Also to be noted that the only players that can be certain of TFGM's alignment at this point are myself and scum.

[Zachrulez]

Today is referencing this game day. As in Day 1 of the game.

Ah.... Alright, I see now. Thanks for the correction.

That was an interesting exchange.

[Zachrulez]

That was an interesting exchange.

How so?

Interesting from the point of view that I think it makes you two less likely to be scum together.

[Zachrulez]

Strange that you would entertain that train of thought while you're apparently suspicious of me.

[Zachrulez]

On the subject of Ronnieroo, I need to re-read her posts and see if I can better my read on her.

[Zachrulez]

Reckoner and Geek are pretty close to tied for #3 for me. I guess if I made an effort to break the tie I'd say... Geek.

You guys were my top two, but you've fallen down a bit on re-reading.

[Zachrulez]

Who's your number 3 Reckoner?

[Zachrulez]

Because that comment seems to have the intent of wanting to increase suspicion in response to a statement I made that was designed to try to deflate some.

I don't really get why you felt it important to counter my statement, given that I'm fully capable of being wrong, and also because I didn't state as an absolute that they can't be scum together.

It's a statement designed to intentionally fuel suspicion over a specific possibility without openly supporting that possibility.

[Zachrulez]

You mean me.

[Zachrulez]

Zach there are mafia that do that in other games. You'll note I said it was unlikley.
If these people continue playing mafia they're bound to run into a pair of mafia goons that will attempt to do this.

Yeah, I'm well aware, I've seen it and experienced it...

[Zachrulez]

Zach there are mafia that do that in other games. You'll note I said it was unlikley.
If these people continue playing mafia they're bound to run into a

pair of mafia goons

that will attempt to do this.

I was looking to respond to the most recent post, but then I caught this.

What makes you say this?

[Zachrulez]

Vote: Ronnieroo

[Zachrulez]

And if you need anymore than 341 to feel confident that Ronnieroo is scum, continuing to drag this matter through the mud serves to accomplish nothing but distracting us from scumhunting.

[Zachrulez]

Ronnie, his "logic" is that you have extra info that tells you there's two mafia goons.

I want to see what Zachrulez himself says about the matter, but I suspect that this is his logic.

Looking at what ronnieroo posted, I mostly see it as a general phrase rather than as a specific slip admitting knowledge. However, ronnieroo is my #3 person looking back through the posts. She generally doesn't post that much, and I'm waiting to see if her post truly is a scumslip before I would rate her higher.

You don't seriously expect her to admit it was a slip do you?

[Zachrulez]

Well Zach, you got your wish. I found someone scummier than BlueRaven.

Unvote
Vote: Zachrulez

Ronnie, his "logic" is that you have extra info that tells you there's two mafia goons.

Also, If I was going to give my #3 scum, it'd be reckoner solely off a gut feeling. IMHO that's worthless, but hey. You asked.

Since that vote only basically says I'm scummier with no real reasoning as to why, I can only laugh.

[Zachrulez]

Ok the reason I put mafia goons in, is because most beginners would be familar with that particular pair... I wasn't sure and didn't want to confuse someone by putting out a role they knew nothing about. I can go through all the possible combos of mafia groups you may run into, but that would be extremly boring. Besides that from my expirence there's not always a godfather in a noobie game, but there are usually at least two goons. Thus, I chose to go with the more common thing (At least from my expirence that's more common).

@Zack what do you mean by "pulling this through the mud"?
Do you seriously expect me to not defend myself?

I expect you to defend yourself.

I also expect you won't admit that was a slip based on knowledge of the game setup.

[Zachrulez]

Following up 354. Geek, Ronnieroo chose to use the term "a pair of mafia goons" instead of a far more generic "scumteam" term. Which would have also gotten her point across in a far less scummy way.

I think her knowledge of the setup made her use the term "a pair of mafia goons" before actually thinking about the consequences of what she said.

It is far scummier than anything else I have observed through this game thus far.

[Zachrulez]

Whoa, lotsa content here.

Ronnieroo's slip:
I am not the brightest crayon in the box. I make at the least 1 or 2 "Freudian slips" per game. On my scum radar, Freudian slips are minor scumtells or null tells, depending on how bad they are. In my eyes, that is the only thing that could be considered a scumtell. So, her slip doesn't direct my scum radar to her...but to Reckoner and Zach, for so quickly jumping on her. (Particularly Reckoner, since Zach constantly seems to throw his vote around.)

Reckoner just asked everyone for their top 3 for scum:
I'm having such problems answering this simple question that I really need to reread. I've been saying that I should multiple times, sorry that I keep getting sidetracked. =/ I currently have a Top 4 scummy people, 2 neutral people, and 3 town-ish people (including me ) - But I'll be working on that. So, more content coming later!

*sigh*

Go back and read post 341.

Then read post 2.

It will start to make sense to you very quickly.

[Zachrulez]

Also, go back and read post 329, and note Ronnieroo's response in 330. (Which consequently was her first post in that game to that point in 2 days.)

[Zachrulez]

I can see I'm going to have to lay out a more detailed itinerary of ronnieroo's play.

I spy with my little eye... a condradiction.

You said it the above post

I don't like first day random kills

And then when KittyMo votes for you, you vote for her "for voting for you". That isn't exactly random... but it still doesn't strike me as well thought out or logical. It appears to me to be a joke vote, which you say you don't approve of.

I personally think that things can be observed from someones day one vote. Even if we don't nail a mafia member we still can observe who voted for who, and in this case, who voted no lynch.

Points out contradiction made by TFGM early in the game. Is careful not to take strong position against TFGM. Does not vote.

0.o

How does it seem like a coordinated attack?
Even if it is, there aren't enough mafia members to cause a lynch on their own. They would have to get someone to follow them. geek is a new member (I think), so naturally he's going to follow. The following does worry me though. I don't like to feel like someone is jumping on a band wagon.
If GreenMonkey is innocent then my suspicions would move over to either KittyMo or geek. Currently the contradiction and vote for no lynch naturally bring me to suspect you though GreenMonkey.

The biggest thing wrong in this post is that Ronnie points out that mafia can't get a lynch on their own, and that they need to get people to follow them. By this logic, followers are town, but she tries to lay a condition out to cast suspicion on Geek and Kittymo. Strangely though, she makes it a point to call geek a follower...

This is a classic waiting in the wings to blame people for a mislynch.

My eye currently falls on BlueRaven.

It sounds like you're saying that by not defending that makes you town. Well that is a very very bad defense. For one thing, I think you may be using it to fall back on. If you're town (particularly if you have power role) you should fight to stay alive. You've contributed nothing. Your posts are confusing. All of this looks very scummy to me. I've never really bought the "I'm a noob" excuse. Can you please answer KittyMo's questions? If you answer them well it might help convince me of your innocence.

Kitty Mo where did you hear that lynch only if the numbers are odd? Do you think that that is a good idea? I really am going to have to say I don't.

Suspicions flip to Blueraven. Never states if or how this changes her read of TFGM. Doesn't vote. Not voting here is more striking cause she states that Blueraven is

very scummy

.

My main point going into this line of thought is that both people I've voted for thus far have been obviously suspect and that's why I voted for them. Plain and simple.

You just admitted you're following others. This makes me very suspicous of you. Just because someone is "obviously a suspect" doesn't mean that they're mafia. Thinking for yourself is always the best way to go in a game like this. If you follow others you risk following a mafia member. Listen to other peoples arguments, express your own thoughts, and vote only after thinking it through.

Fixed the quote from the original post first off. Attacks Geek for "following others." Apparently the logic for this being scummy is the danger of following a mafia member. This stinks of Ronnieroo knowing Geek's alignment.

KeyBlade... Suggesting that someone hinted at the fact that they were cop is a bad idea... Especially if it wasn't an obvious hint. When I read that at first I, too, thought it may've been a hint, but when I re-read it I came to the conclusion that KittyMo meant "investigation" by re-reading the thread and re-evaluating her thinking. If KittyMo is the cop having her night killed would be very bad for town. If she isn't, and she's night killed it's still bad for town. It's possible that she's mafia throwing that comment out there to make the townies think she's innocent.

I feel as if Zach is controling the game at this moment. Leading sheep to water is ridiculously easy in a noobie game... especially when you're an IC. I'm not in ANYWAY saying don't listen to Zach. I'm saying make sure that you're thinking for yourself and not just following the logic of others. It's fine to agree... just don't blindly follow.

xRECKONERx... you don't even remember who you voted for? That shows how much attention you've been paying... Not remembering who you voted/denying voting for someone you did vote for makes me very suspicous of you. Forgetful or scummy? Hmm...

Just a few thoughts.

Deflates Keyblade's breadcrumb observation of Kittymo. Tries to distance from the possibility of her being a cop. Makes sure to point out that KittyMo could be bread crumbing as mafia.

Casts suspicion on me for "controlling the game". Tries to have it both ways by saying that she's not ACTUALLY trying to say not to listen to me though.

Casts suspicion on Reckoner for not paying attention. Does not commit to whether the behavior is scummy or not.

KittyMo: KeyBlade12 and Zach currently draw my eye toward them.
KeyBlade12 because of the bread crumb thing. Pointing out that someone hinted at being cop worries me.
Zach because he's leading.

@Zach I feel as though you're leading because people are following you. If you look back at the thread you'll see that people follow your logic without really thinking for themselves. (Or at least that's how it looks to me... Maybe they just aren't stating their own thoughts)

Note no specific examples of people following me. She just assures me that if I read the thread, "it's there".

I'm here. Like I said I don't say anything unless I have something useful to say.
(And just to clear it up, I am a she...)

@Zach anyone who has an influence immediatly draws my eye, because if you're mafia you're very dangerous. I don't think you can disagree with that. If you find anything that draws your eye, just point it our and I will gladly explain my actions.

Just to let you all know, I will have no interenet connection at all from the 13-18. I don't know if that requires a replacement or not.

Makes excuse for lurking. Appeals to fear by saying that if I'm mafia I'm very dangerous.

That about sums it up. I think I've covered her posts after this quite well. Just keep in mind that throughout this entire game, Ronnieroo has had suspicions, but has not voted. That behavior is consistent to not wanting to be tied to a lynch.

[Zachrulez]

I'm still not sure about the case against ronnieroo you outlined, Zachrulez.... She just mostly seems to be analyzing the game and putting points out there for others to analyze in the posts you noted.

Seeing which way the wind blows...

[Zachrulez]

The game state has more to do with how often I change my vote than my alignment does.

Replacing into a game also makes it tougher to get reads on people.

Are you trying to say I wasn't aggressive in either of those games you linked?

[Zachrulez]

And there's this game

Meta isn't everything though.

[Zachrulez]

Also you shouldn't be hung up on the quantity of how often I am changing my vote, but rather on whether you can see the logic behind all my vote changes.

You'll do far better scum hunting on that basis.

[Zachrulez]

But the rapid manner in which you change your votes would suggest that not even

you

fully believe your own logic.

The problem isn't that so much as my read on who the most scummy player is has changed as many times as my vote has.

As it is now, I'm pretty firmly settled on desiring Ronnieroo as the lynch of the day.

[Zachrulez]

Not no matter what as an absolute. I don't see it likely that a more compelling case is going to come at this point to convince me to vote for anyone else though.

[Zachrulez]

You selectively quoted my post in an attempt to make my active lurking point look really scummy.

I'm here. Like I said I don't say anything unless I have something useful to say.
(And just to clear it up, I am a she...)

@Zach anyone who has an influence immediatly draws my eye, because if you're mafia you're very dangerous. I don't think you can disagree with that. If you find anything that draws your eye, just point it our and I will gladly explain my actions.

Just to let you all know, I will have no interenet connection at all from the 13-18. I don't know if that requires a replacement or not.

Makes excuse for lurking. Appeals to fear by saying that if I'm mafia I'm very dangerous.

The ENTIRE quoted post, in context.

Clearly she wasn't V/LA yet. It's quite clear the lurking I'm referring to is the lurking she explained away on the top line, all of which occured prior to today, the 13th, which is her first official day on V/LA.

Selectively quoting in this manner is scummy by the way.

[Zachrulez]

EBWOP: Sorry, last point against ronnieroo argument was a misquote. For some reason, didn't see the first part of what she wrote which was:

I'm here. Like I said I don't say anything unless I have something useful to say.
(And just to clear it up, I am a she...)

Maybe the bold put me off.... Anyway, rest of my argument still stands.

Yeah it just happened to take you 20 minutes to correct it... and you did so after I pointed it out.

Forgive me if I don't buy it.

[Zachrulez]

Besides that one clear error (which I'm definitely admitting was an accidental misquote on my part and it shouldnt be included with the rest of the piece), what do you think about the rest of my post against you?

Other than the point about me switching my vote which is based on meta which lacks an example of where I voted like that as scum?

Other than the point about you claiming my vote was OMGUS despite the fact that you were voting Blueraven at the time?

Feel free to refute my case against Ronnieroo at any time, rather than just summarily dismissing the points as weak.

So far the only point you've attempted to refute in the case is based on a misquote that you've now backtracked from, which as I glance through your case, would be the strongest point against me if only it were true.

As it is now, your reasons for voting for me are unacceptable.

[Zachrulez]

Yes, and I wouldn't be surprised.

I still think Ronnieroo is a better lynch though.

[Zachrulez]

I already explained how Geek misquoted me.

It doesn't change the case on Ronnieroo.

But I can easily back lynching either one to be honest.

[Zachrulez]

Are you saying you're being intentionally scummy so that you can make me eat those words?

That's not a good argument if you're trying to discredit me.

[Zachrulez]

This is getting a tad ridiculous now.

I'm attacked for changing my vote.

I hold a firm position and I'm attacked for that.

Logic and reason is quickly getting lost in this game.

[Zachrulez]

I'm going to have to

Unvote

. I just gave zach's case on ronnie another reread, and if anything, all it does is sway me to believe she is

town

and that zach is just pushing his "cases" onto people to see which one sticks.

If that's the case, you should just lynch me now.

You have no idea how many times I've heard people say that to the inevitable lynch no matter what they say.

It's very obvious that I'm not going to be able to help you guys in catching scum because you're not going to listen to a word I say or allow me to change my mind.

There's really no point in me saying anything more.

[Zachrulez]

My top 3 scum suspects are

Ronnieroo, Geekalicious, and Keyblade, should you guys care at any point.

[Zachrulez]

And yes, I'm very frustrated with this game at the moment, and it makes me lose a little bit of hope for the human race. I don't mean that as an insult on any of you, but it's just the way I'm feeling about this particular game at this time.

[Zachrulez]

If that's the case, you should just lynch me now.

You have no idea how many times I've heard people say that to the inevitable lynch no matter what they say.

It's very obvious that I'm not going to be able to help you guys in catching scum because you're not going to listen to a word I say or allow me to change my mind.

There's really no point in me saying anything more.

...

Seriously, Zachrulez, you only have two votes on you, and you're already resorting to that sort of attitude instead of defending yourself?

Yeah, stop gloating scum, there's a good chance you're gonna get your mislynch.

ITT: I learn that my town play in newbie 784 was a lot better than my town play in this game.

[Zachrulez]

My only real crime in this game was voting too early/quickly about 4 times over.

But if I must pay for that mistake, then I will serve as an example to newbies as to exactly what NOT to do in a mafia game.

[Zachrulez]

Probably should have said mistakes... lol

[Zachrulez]

Yeah, stop gloating scum, there's a good chance you're gonna get your mislynch.

Zachrulez, why are you being so bitter? You're an IC, you should be used to the process of defending yourself.

I'm not gloating at all. I just want you to play the game and defend yourself instead of giving up.

I'm a sore loser.

I am defending myself, constantly. But I've been through this so many times I know how the momentum goes, and I know what's inevitable based on the response to my defenses.

I am so certain you are scum too, that's the sad thing. I bet even if I showed them your role pm they wouldn't believe me... lol

[Zachrulez]

Also I will note to this point, that the ONLY point that has been challenged directly from my ronnieroo case is Geek's misquote of my lurking point. (Which he backtracked from like the scumbag he is.)

In refuting and dismissing my case, it has only been generically called weak, without any specific points addressed, and zero reasoning as to why the points are not valid.

And you can't see why I'm frustrated?

[Zachrulez]

Scumbag is slang for what we call scum around these parts by the way, and should in no way be taken as a personal insult.

[Zachrulez]

Yeah, I shouldn't have voted for Krauthammer before doing a read on Ronnieroo, I screwed up bigtime there.

I also jumped the gun on voting like 3 other times.

Blegh, just pretend I never played in this game... lol

I hope you listen to my case after you know for fact that I'm town though.

[Zachrulez]

I don't buy Ronnieroo's explanation, and I don't think it's any coincidence that Geek is pushing hard to make the game about me at this point.

Also, I believe quite strongly that Reckoner, Blueraven, KittyMo, and Psycho are town. Town should not waste their time on them.

Kraut could go either way (Or his replacement now.)

Scum is in Ronnieroo, Keyblade, and Geek. Believe it.

[Zachrulez]

And yes, I changed my mind about Keyblade again.

Obvscum! lol...

No but really, that role fishing is really bad.

[Zachrulez]

Again, sorry it took so long for me to post some decent content. I'm completely and totally confused by my other game, and I get distracted a lot by reading past games and hitting the random button in the Mafia Scum Wiki.

My gut's telling me to unvote Zach, but there's just too many scumtells here. =/ I hate my brain-gut conflicts, I get them every game.

You have to do what feels right Kitty. It it helps you can think of it as payback for what I did to you in 784.

[Zachrulez]

By the way, when I use the word certain, I mean it in the context that I am certain about my read of him.

For what it's worth.

[Zachrulez]

Then you build a very weak case on her. When called on it, you appeal to emotion and complain that if you switch postions, you're called scummy, but if you keep attacking the same person, you're called scummy too. If you had better reasons for suspecting ronnieroo, nobody would complain. You're missing the point here.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD YOU ARE THE THIRD PERSON TO COMPLAIN THAT THE CASE IS WEAK WITHOUT DIRECTLY REFUTING ANY POINTS.

THIS IS A SOURCE OF MY FRUSTRATION AND IS STARTING TO PISS ME OFF. THIS IS LAZY PLAY.

I CAN SUSPECT MORE THAN ONE PLAYER AT A TIME. I CAN ONLY LYNCH ONE.

Stop calling the case weak without explaining why it's weak. Explain why it's weak. Otherwise you're not actually reading the case and simply believing the first person who said it's weak. (Who probably didn't bother to delve into why it's weak either.)

Both Ronnieroo and Geek are scummy.

[Zachrulez]

But your case is otherwise well intentioned...

[Zachrulez]

Stop calling the case weak without explaining why it's weak. Explain why it's weak. Otherwise you're not actually reading the case and simply believing the first person who said it's weak. (Who probably didn't bother to delve into why it's weak either.)

Both Ronnieroo and Geek are scummy.

Your wish shall be granted. Expect an answer in a few minutes.

THANK YOU!

Maybe we can actually have some rational discussion now.

[Zachrulez]

Everyone:
1) What do you think of my case?
2) Do you think we should wait until 12Keyblade and ronnieroo get back until we lynch anyone?
3) Who do you think is the best lynch candidate for today?

1. I think your case is plausible. It's similar to my problems with Zachrulez, though you did state it more coherently.
2. It seems like the appropriate thing to do. We don't want to rush things before we've heard their voices. There may be the possibility that 12Keyblade may want to change his vote.
3. Well, my vote is on Zachrulez, so....

Buddying to Kittymo thank you very much.

[Zachrulez]

Not voting when you have strong suspicions is very scummy.

It's consistent with a scum that is trying to blend in as a townie who's acting like they don't want to mislynch when their real motive is to blame the townies that back the mislynches stronger then the weak positions they take all day.

[Zachrulez]

I want to emphasize how grateful I am that you actually took the time to look through my case and challenge it directly once again Kitty.

[Zachrulez]

Everyone:
1) What do you think of my case?
2) Do you think we should wait until 12Keyblade and ronnieroo get back until we lynch anyone?
3) Who do you think is the best lynch candidate for today?

1. I think your case is plausible. It's similar to my problems with Zachrulez, though you did state it more coherently.
2. It seems like the appropriate thing to do. We don't want to rush things before we've heard their voices. There may be the possibility that 12Keyblade may want to change his vote.
3. Well, my vote is on Zachrulez, so....

Buddying to Kittymo thank you very much.

You'd be surprised how many people get accused of buddying me. I think it's beginning to become an abnormal number...

KittyMo says: What do you think about my case?

Geekalicious says: OMG! That's exactly what I was thinking! You're so smart Kitty!

[Zachrulez]

I was just interpreting how Geek's response to your first question sounded to me.

[Zachrulez]

Oh OK.

What are your feelings about this buddying?

My feelings are that a scum is buddying up to you.

[Zachrulez]

He said that you got your points across more coherently.

So yeah.

[Zachrulez]

KittyMo says: What do you think about my case?

Geekalicious says: OMG! That's exactly what I was thinking! You're so smart Kitty!

My feelings are that a scum is buddying up to you.

I'm not even sure what to say about this... I brought up my points against you first and even did a full analysis of your analysis on ronnieroo before KittyMo did. All I said was that I agreed with her points (when she specifically asked for our opinions) and now suddenly I'm trying to scum buddy with her?

I don't really know what I think of it either... I mean, just because Geek posted agreement with me doesn't make him buddying up to me. He never said that I was "so smart."

Now that I think about it, Zach, your buddying claim seems kinda scummy to me. Another thing to add to the list...

And you're not really thinking about it. You're thinking about it in a way to further rationalize my lynch.

I'm gonna lay off this game for a little bit. The heat of the moment is probably not doing me any favors.

[Zachrulez]

I'm not claiming, so you're just going to have to go with what you have right now.

[Zachrulez]

Because it's my choice and I have made it.

You'll find out my role when you lynch me.

[Zachrulez]

Respectfully I disagree.

[Zachrulez]

What grounds?

How about the fact that it's my role to play how I chose.

And I chose to not tell the scum what my role is and find it somewhat amusing that you'd find that stupid.

[Zachrulez]

I'm vanilla by the way.

I was holding onto the slim possibility of surviving and possibly drawing the NK in that scenario.

[Zachrulez]

You wait for the mod to come in and reveal my role, which will confirm everything I said.

Then you try again on day 2.

[Zachrulez]

btw because of this we've achived 3rd in the longest nwb day 1.

http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Records

I'm not sure when the last time those stats were updated, but I believe newbie 707 holds the longest newbie day AND the longest day 1 newbie day at something like 765 posts.

I would know this because I was a part of that game.

[Zachrulez]

Argh. I don't think I have ever seen a game won by no lynch like that before.

In hindsight, I was WAY too easy on Kittymo, who I should have pressured for voting TFGM over Geek. Kitty should have known better, and as it turns out, I was right to be suspicious about that, I just ended up fingering the wrong person... sorry about that Geek.

Also disappointed in myself for changing my mind about Keyblade. Also shocked that he didn't get lynched on day 2 though...

This shows you what happens when you see so much scummy behavior, and can't focus on who you think is scum.

Oh, and I refused to claim because it would have been harmful to town to do so. All it would have accomplished was telling scum I wasn't power. I didn't want to give the scum an excuse to do anything because of a claim by me, and felt that the reactions from my lynch would be better without a claim. You guys could have also backed off after I claimed, which I thought would have been even worse than claiming. (Especially if we failed to lynch scum after that.)

And I really did earn that lynch. I'm not proud of my play in this game.

Also part of me wishes I had let the town just lynch Blueraven even though I knew he was town. (Since he ended up not voting in lylo) Oh well.

[Zachrulez]

Well, we had a very inactive town. I had a gut read on 12Keyblade, and just as I got NK'd, I had considered Kitty as a possibility. I know you're not supposed to use the Too Townie fallacy, but that's what it seemed like.

All in all, poor showing by the town. Keyblade and Kitty literally controlled this entire game. Frustrating to watch >=O

Good job, Kitty/Keyblade.

Would have probably gone a lot better for us had I not changed my mind about keyblade. Power of hindsight and all.

Kitty's attack on TFGM was scummy, but I ended up attacking the newbie for it instead of her. That was a massive mistake.

[Zachrulez]

But why didn't you claim cop and reveal your guilty finding, ronnie?

She was roleblocked both nights. She didn't get any results.

[Zachrulez]

Zachrulez - I was so excited to have you lynched Day 1! You were one of the smartest players of the game, an IC, and to top it all off, know my meta better than anyone else in the game. I felt bad playing such a large role in getting you lynched, though, since you so honestly believed I was town. =/ At least we're getting-each-other-lynched-Day-1-buddies now. Hahaha. Let's be on the same team next game. Ummmm, I don't think you actually deserved your lynch until you started being a sore loser about it.

In this game, I have learned that suspecting 4 people at the same time is not the way to go about playing a mafia newbie game as town.

As to your following commentary about your VT meta, I actually had you pegged as a power role, so claiming vanilla would have probably given you some problems if I had still been around. Great foresight on that lynch... *shakes fist.*

[Zachrulez]

*sigh* Well, I will congratulate you KittyMo for being so great at being scum. I honestly don't recall have anything to suspect you for.

One of the main things I would change about my play in the game would be how I handled when Riddle was getting lynched. I just had a very nasty feeling about that lynch, but I was afraid that if he flipped scum after I had defended him heavily then it would be considered a scum tell and lead to me being lynched on Day 3. Very, very bad decision in retrospect and I should have gone with my gut feeling on the situation.

Also, I'm just all round upset with the heavy lurking by town on Day 3, though (myself included). If the town had more active players, then I think we could have at least brought down 12Keyblade.

Anyway, thank you guys for an all round interesting game. I've honestly never done a mafia game before and I think this was a pretty good introduction.

And Zachrulez, no hard feelings for you wanting to lynch me (though that tantrum before the lynch was.... alright, it was kind of funny ). I was acting like a newbie scum ball on Day 1, so I really don't blame you.

Well, I didn't realize that both scum had actually voted for me when I had reached 3 votes.

But still... I think I would have lynched me in this game. I couldn't decide who I thought was actually scum, (I should have stuck with keyblade... ) and ended up looking like a scumball myself.

Your vote for TFGM was scummy, but Kittymo's was scummier because she wasn't a newbie. My ignorance to that fact probably had something to do with unceremoniously lynching her as a VT in the previous game I played with her, I ended up giving her too much leeway, and paid for it.

[Zachrulez]

Also, I gotta say that the part of the game that probably amused me the most was when Keyblade immediately called Ronnieroo scum after she claimed cop after having a town read on her all game in general. How he was not immediately and unceremoniously lynched after that... I will never know.

You couldn't have written "I WANT TO LYNCH THE COP!" in bigger letters if you tried.

[Zachrulez]

Your vote for TFGM was scummy, but Kittymo's was scummier because she wasn't a newbie. My ignorance to that fact probably had something to do with unceremoniously lynching her as a VT in the previous game I played with her, I ended up giving her too much leeway, and paid for it.

Yeahhhh I'm a pretty stupid VT. I'll get better someday...

at. You made some mistakes in that game that made you look scummy yes. I also ignored behavior from you that indicated you might be town because I had already decided you were scum.

Also, I gotta say that the part of the game that probably amused me the most was when Keyblade immediately called Ronnieroo scum after she claimed cop after having a town read on her all game in general. How he was not immediately and unceremoniously lynched after that... I will never know.

Because I didn't tell them to. Nobody ever did anything Day 3 unless I told them to.

Regardless of the game situation, I was just left thinking... wow.

[Zachrulez]

I wouldn't say you don't want to hammer as a general rule when you're scum. There was a situation in this newbie game I was playing as scum at the same time as this one where it would have made perfect sense for me to hammer had the situation not changed in the face of an approaching deadline. The momentum happened to change to another player at the last minute, which was actually something I didn't expect. (Because the town actually backed off of a vanilla claim on the player in question that I was in position to hammer.)

What is probably more accurate to say is that when you are scum, you don't want a hammer vote to stand out, which is why you try to avoid doing it in general, because there's a lot of potential risk in your hammer doing exactly that. (See Amberrock in newbie 784, and keyblade in this one.) Jumping the gun might seem fine on the surface, but breaking an agreement not to hammer will make your vote stand out.

[Zachrulez]

Well you also said you don't WANT to be the hammer vote.

My disagreement stems from the stance that you want to be whatever vote makes the most sense and makes you look the most pro-town, as opposed to the mentality of intentionally avoiding a vote in a particular position.

At any rate, the scum hammer is one of my favorite scumtells, because it almost always works in catching scum.

[Zachrulez]

Well you also said you don't WANT to be the hammer vote.

My disagreement stems from the stance that you want to be whatever vote makes the most sense and makes you look the most pro-town, as opposed to the mentality of intentionally avoiding a vote in a particular position.

At any rate, the scum hammer is one of my favorite scumtells, because it almost always works in catching scum.

"I'm not sure this paticular player is scum, but I'll vote for them anyway so that we can know for sure."

Is textbook of scum not wanting to be held responsible for the mislynch they have just hammered.

[Zachrulez]

This game took forever, and ended in a no lynch? Bwahahaha.

Anyway, I was hoping to use my protect as something like an investigation. It seemed like Kittymo was the obvious NK choice since literally no one had been suspicious of her, so if they killed anyone other than her, I'd have a strong reason to suspect her. So basically, by protecting her I'd have either a save or evidence for scum.

The only way it could have failed was for me to be NK'ed so I couldn't say anything

But yeah...guys, if you have someone alive in LyLo who is that "clean", you should be suspicious of them for that! Those are exactly the people that mafia wants dead, and their survival should raise questions for you. I know that might sound kind of weird, but there it is.

That would be the too townie fallacy.

Though I have pointed out things that Kittymo could have, and should have been scrutinized for, but wasn't for whatever reason.

[Zachrulez]

There's a difference between "you look so town, you must be scum" and "you look so much more town than everyone else, yet you're still alive while more suspicious players have been NK'ed---why is that?"

Overall, mafia wants to kill the players they'll have the hardest time lynching. If those players don't get night-killed, you have reason to be suspicious of them.

That's still the too townie fallacy.

If you can find a good argument against the player in that they're scum trying to APPEAR pro town rather than actually being pro-town, then you have a good argument.

But suspecting town looking players for not dying is too townie, and also WIFOM.

[Zachrulez]

So, I guess because there's a name for it and you've attached the word 'fallacy' to it, it must be wrong. There's a name for that kind of thinking, too (and it really is a fallacy).

Your logic draws the conclusion that a player who looks townie but hasn't been nightkilled is scum because scum can't be nightkilled. Experience will teach you that this isn't as black and white as you think it is. (I've had to learn this the hard way.)

Overall the mafia's win condition demands that they should be nightkilling the least lynchable players.

The mafia's win condition demands that they kill the townies until they comprise a majority. They can send in nightkills based on whatever reason they see fit.

If they don't do that, there are three possibilities:

1. They're trying to WIFOM the town.
2. They don't NK the least lynchable player because the least lynchable players is scum.
3. The mafia is stupid.

Which is refuted by the above because it's based on one singular presumption of how the mafia nightkill when there's really many reasons.

They could hunt for power roles (and the players exhibiting power tells are not the least lynchable players.

They can leave alive town looking players who are not suspicious of them and kill someone who is.

They can kill someone not suspicious of them and leave someone alive who is.

They can kill based on minimizing bandwagon analysis.

That's just a few I can think of off the top of my head.

One and three require us to assume that the maf is playing against their win condition. Overall, two is more likely, so it's a scumtell. Please come back with an argument that say it isn't, which consists of more than calling it a dirty name and attaching the word fallacy at the end.

And it doesn't make the mafia stupid. I have called people town who are actually town and intentionally left them alive before because the style of their play benefited my ends.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 76#1834976

This game is a good example of that.

[Zachrulez]

And a whole different issue with that idea is that mafia may not see the same player you do as the least lynchable player.

I have watched people I was certain were scum eat a NK because the mafia didn't see things my way.

[Zachrulez]

Your logic draws the conclusion that a player who looks townie but hasn't been nightkilled is scum because scum can't be nightkilled. Experience will teach you that this isn't as black and white as you think it is. (I've had to learn this the hard way.)

No, it draws the conclusion that it becomes more

likely

that they're scum if that happens than if it didn't. That's all any scumtell can do.

The rest of your points are answered when you realize that, I think.

Well mathematically everyone left in the game is more likely to be scum for the mere fact that there are fewer players left in the game and a higher percentage of scum in the game.

But not being nked is not a scumtell. It's something you have no control over as town.

[Zachrulez]

EBWOP:
By the way, the reason I wanted a massclaim because I was dying to find out who the cop was. lol

ROLEFISHING! OBV SCUM!

Daykill: Kittymo